Vision Language Models have demonstrated remarkable proficiency in interpreting static visual artifacts, but modern data analysis is inherently dynamic, requiring the active interrogation of interactive environments. Existing benchmarks are predominantly constrained to static imagery and one-shot question answering and fail to capture the epistemic demands of this domain, where evidence is frequently occluded, distributed across linked views, or conditionally revealed through user agency. In this paper, we introduce InSight, a benchmark for agentic claim verification over interactive visualizations. The dataset consists of 21,349 claims derived from human-authored analytical narratives and grounded in fully interactive web-based environments. Agents must navigate these environments to determine whether a natural language claim is supported, refuted or not verifiable given the available evidence. Unlike traditional evaluations, InSight treats interaction traces as intrinsic proxies for reasoning, enabling a rigorous audit of how models seek and synthesize visual evidence. We evaluate state-of-the-art models, revealing that interactive verification remains a non-trivial challenge. We release InSight at https://github.com/maevehutch/insight.

We present a new dataset for chart question answering (CQA) constructed from visualization notebooks. The dataset features real-world, multi-view charts paired with natural language questions grounded in analytical narratives. Unlike prior benchmarks, our data reflects ecologically valid reasoning workflows. Benchmarking state-of-the-art multimodal large language models reveals a significant performance gap, with GPT-4.1 achieving an accuracy of 69.3%, underscoring the challenges posed by this more authentic CQA setting.